Boards›Gameplay

Honestly I would be ok with LoL having a box cost at this point

Eedat··30 votes·7,994 views

Title. Charge $20-$25 (€16 - €20) for a new account. Of course, accounts that have been made already will be grandfathered in, but not receive the content.

Of course, there would have to be some other changes. Give these new accounts a pre-selection of 20 champs of varying different roles. In addition, give these accounts 10 champion selector vouchers that can be used to purchase champs of their choice. Give them 4 rune pages instead of the default 2. Maybe some cosmetics? Honestly this would just be being genrous at this point but maybe 2 vouchers for 975-1350RP skins and one 1820 RP skin voucher? Or perhaps a couple of cosmetic-only hextech boxes.

Benefits:

  1. would severely reduce the number of bots new players have to deal with. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of these bot account get banned. They get banned in waves as opposed to one by one which is why you see these accounts get a bunch of games in. The solution the botters use is just sheer numbers. Just keep pushing tons of these bots through and some of them will make it just by sheer sample size. If they were charged $25 per attempt, the price per account that made it would be so ridiculously high that there would be no way they could make money on it.

Poof, botters gone.

  1. Pseudo deterant for people coming back after getting permabanned. Listen, I'm no dummy. I know $25 isnt some insurmountable amount of money. I'm aware this wont stop the majority of people from buying a new account. Maybe it would stop some though.

  2. This one is more for Riot. Its obvious there is a large market for alt accounts. A quick Google search pulls up dozens of sites selling cheap unranked accounts. Why not aquire that revenue for yourself? Its very apparent that there is a lot of money to be made on new accounts

  3. A better new player experience. The twenty preselected champs plus the free champion rotation will give new players plenty to entertain themselves with. The vouchers give them more chances for when they inevitably buy a champ they dont end up liking. The current 3 refunds for the life of the account system is pretty brutal. This system also removes the wall in front of draft pick.

Now those are some benefits. Lets take a look at some possible drawbacks.

  • Would this make it easier for banned players with disposible income to come back? I agree in some cases it would. However, these are the players that just buy a cheap smurf account online. So if they want to spend the money, theyre coming back anyway or just making a new free account.

  • The F2P model is more enticing to people who haven't played before. I normally would agree, but LoL is such an established game at this point that you more or less know what you're getting. F2P models work for newer, unknown games. Once you've reached the level of a game like LoL, its not really needed.

  • Thats a lot of content for $25 if you compare to à la carte prices. Won't Riot lose money? Honestly I dont think so. Maybe you could not include the cosmetic content in the package. Honestly I think by creating happier customers they are more willing to spend money in the future. By giving them 10 champ vouchers, I think people will be more inclined to buy cosmetics for them over the cheap champs people pick up to access draft pick.

So what do you think? Good idea? Horrendous idea? "WOW SO FUCKING STUPID EEDAT HOW COULD YOU BE THAT DUMB" idea?

40 Comments

hhaavviikk12 votes

doesn't stop assholes from acting like assholes on overwatch, getting banned and then buying another copy of overwatch to keep acting like an asshole.

I'll tell you right now I'd never have gotten into this game if I had to pay 20-25 euro upfront, not happening, not if it doesn't unlock me every champion content in the game

KVbqbFsC8e9 votes

I don't see how this would benefit anybody. It would hurt the popularity and growth of the game.

YoungFarmer2 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Big Piece,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=fEpEpIPa,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2018-04-09T19:54:37.861+0000)

I don't see how this would benefit anybody. It would hurt the popularity and growth of the game.

I don't think the game is really growing much anymore. League is too old to get into now. Would be like getting into WoW just not worth it.

Xonra1 votes

It might not grow to the extent it used to but it is in fact still growing. Hell +1 person is still growth. Just a fact of what is what, like it or not.

People that are salty like to claim tons of people are quitting and this game is dying, but that is just factually wrong in more ways than one.

Pynndragon1 votes

I'd agree, but factually League is more stagnant right now. It's not seeing large growth (if you are using Twitch viewers, and I know not everyone watches Twitch but it's a great way to keep track of people interested in LoL), but it's not declining either. That's not saying "LEAGUE IS DYING EVERYONE ABANDON SHIP" but is more like saying that League of Legends has a solid fanbase that will keep up with LoL events, games, and the like. Some people have moved on, but the people who truly enjoy the game have stayed. You can see that with other games too, like Overwatch for example. I remember that game being super popular on release, but now it's around a constant viewer number (I know shorter time frame but can apply to other games as well, I guess. Smash 4/Melee are games I play a lot, name checks out, but they're not dying games with their very low viewer numbers. Mind you, not growing either).

As StupidSexyZilean was saying, it certainly is not growing as much. He wasn't saying it's dead, just that people don't want to get into League as much, which factually is a fair thing to say. He didn't seem salty at all to me, but maybe I'm missing something.

xPhantomEevee1 votes

{quoted}

I don't think the game is really growing much anymore. League is too old to get into now. Would be like getting into WoW just not worth it.

You say that but new people get interested all the time. I had a group of friends, like 5 or 6 of us, and none of us had played the game or even thought about it in a couple of years. Another one of our friends decided on a whim to try and get into it because he never had and he ended up liking it. Now we all play again at least a couple of days a week

Sure its only +1 new accounts but thats +7 active accounts. And I know thats not a lot in the grand scheme of things but it never would have happened if it was a paid game

YoungFarmer1 votes

{quoted}

You say that but new people get interested all the time. I had a group of friends, like 5 or 6 of us, and none of us had played the game or even thought about it in a couple of years. Another one of our friends decided on a whim to try and get into it because he never had and he ended up liking it. Now we all play again at least a couple of days a week

Sure its only +1 new accounts but thats +7 active accounts. And I know thats not a lot in the grand scheme of things but it never would have happened if it was a paid game

After getting my girlfriend into league, I realized that I would never tell another player to ever play it. Its a fun game, but way to time consuming to get good at or even decent at.

HalcyonDweller6 votes

I like your analysis on this. You dug deep and it makes more sense for it. +1

I'd be in favor of this change, but I'm not sure Riot will be. I have no idea how they feel about their numbers, but I would not be shocked or even upset if they are burying their heads in the sand like most people would do. If bots and alternate account owners stop making new accounts then they will get a very abrupt view of their true player influx. It might be enough of a jolt to screw their income over. This is all just speculation of course, but it's highly possible IMO.

Eedat1 votes

Honestly its extremely rare for Riot to share that kind of data with us to begin with. I think theyve released info twice on how many active users there are, but I dont recall them ever releasing numbers on the number of new players. I could be wrong. Anyway, I'm sure they have a rough idea of how many of these new accounts are bots and really the only thing they care about is how much these new accounts spend. If these new accounts are only spending of an average of $1 per 100 accounts (botters obviously spend no money), thats still way worse than 5 new accounts spending $25 each. The bottom line is the money

HalcyonDweller1 votes

I'm with you, if there is a way to keep it profitable then I don't think Tencent could object. Plus this is only really necessary on Servers that don't have identification for accounts, like how Korea makes people use their SSN to create an account. Not that they would make use of that anyways though since they don't ban people for toxicity over there.

CrazFight 6 votes

I started league back in middle school, there was no way in hell I woulda paid 20$ to play league. IMO it could lose them players could end up playing for years, and lose out on there revenue.

Eedat2 votes

I mean I kinda did say existing accounts wouldn't pay. ...like in the second sentence lol

CrazFight 1 votes

{quoted}

I mean I kinda did say existing accounts wouldn't pay. ...like in the second sentence lol

Im saying if that did exist when I first starting play, and im talking about future potential players that are like me this could affect.

Votable Jester1 votes

What if they gave a free trial like Spoofghoul suggested?

Also what if it was $10 instead of $20 (I don't think it would need to cost a lot to get rid of the bot problem). It's also a one-time payment, unlike WoW and many other popular games.

Xonra2 votes

If it is more than $0, people aren't going to do it.

This game came out like..9 years ago now? Putting a price tag on it would be an instant killer for this game.

Votable Jester1 votes

I'd say the main issue with putting a price on it is the issue of making it less convenient to start, which is an issue.

With a free trial though, I think that would make it a lot easier because people wouldn't have to buy it yet to play it, and if they do end up liking it, it isn't that inconvenient to put in a credit card number online.

Even putting the price at $0.50 would put a dent in bots.

It just depends if they have enough advantage over their competition (in terms of gameplay and popularity) to not just have everyone choose those other games instead.

Kaioko6 votes

The main issue I have with this is that it simply hasn't been done before and the competition isn't doing it.

  1. Games never go from free to pay they always go from pay to free if they are struggling (Aion comes to mind as an example)

  2. A new player whose not sure he/she would enjoy the game now has to decide between Dota 2 which is also established and would be free vs. League which offers the same thing but would force him/her to pay in order to try it. We could do a trial period but the problem would still persist.

Eedat2 votes

Yeah there are for sure some drawbacks. Someine else suggested a month trial period or so before having to pay. That would be a good idea. I dont think many games go from premium to flat out f2p. Most of them keep the box charge and ditch the subscription fees. Thats when games are struggling though. Thats not the case here

Spoofghoul4 votes

Great idea

Ill add some points i think are missing

I think a free trial would be nice for a certain period this way you still keep league pseudo F2P 2 month free trial then you can spend the 20 bucks or 25 or whatever it's going to be. This way new players can still check it out for free and then decide

Perhaps a refer a friend system, you refer a friend they get an xp boost they pick and you get e refund token you can spend to refund purchases for referring that friend. perhaps put a maximum on this to prevent abuse This helps makes it more accessible through making it easier for your referred friend to catch up in xp so you can play together.

This still leaves the paywall to bots and helps new players get started a little easier

Hèntaî 1 votes

I wouldnt even give them 2 months, Id say a couple weeks. It gives them enough time to get a feel for the game without it being too long of a grace period. Then if they like the game give them a small bonus or whatever for playing it through and trying out the free trial. Doesnt need to be much but enough to say "Well thank you for taking a look into our game and deciding that its worth your time :)".

ForFoxSakes3 votes

We've been asking for paid new accounts forever yet they never ever provide a response to it

Xonra1 votes

Who is we? I know I sure as hell haven't. It would kill this game and you'd see no new accounts going forward.

Xonra3 votes

This would benefit exactly no one.

There would be exactly zero new players going forward. This game is popular and the high player base across the world because IT IS FREE TO PLAY.

If there were "Benefits" with the buy in and older players didn't get them because they already play, that would just piss off far more people than the small percentage it would ever bring in from this point going forward (see my first point about free to play and no one buying it).

I could literally keep going for a while here but this is so head scratching of an idea I don't know how it got any upvotes at all.

No flash no life2 votes

{quoted}

I could literally keep going for a while here but this is so head scratching of an idea I don't know how it got any upvotes at all.

As I've presented an upvote myself I feel like I could answer that.

I entirely agree that this suggestion brings a long list of harm to the game.

  • Unpleasanties from the veterans
  • discouraging new and/or young players to try the game
  • difficult for existing players to invite friends
  • going from free to pay is unheard of and creates negative impression
  • newly joined players feel ripped off because old players didn't have to pay
  • encouraging players to share or "sell" their accounts at cheaper price when they quit to those who don't want to pay

the list can go on and I should stop like you did.

In spite of that, the reason I still upvoted (and suggested this idea in player behavior section several times in the past in fact) is because this is the ONLY way to realistically deal with the problems of botting like OP said, and the " idgaf making account is free and easy, so I'm going to disco nunu and singed support to make you all suffer and laugh about it because I can, and do this all over on new account if I get banned after one year of trolling " mentality. It won't solve the problems, but it'll help, it'll bring a change for the better.

Obviously, it still brings more, way more harm than the benefit, so it'll never happen. But you get my point. This is an extremely drastic measure that under normal circumstances should never be considered if the players are decent human beings. But we've all seen it, we've all been through it, anyone who's played enough will inevitably come to realize that's not the case. This community is so obnoxious that such extreme measure is getting considered.

Velzard of Koz2 votes

Yeah pay for the base game and still have to grind for champs and be forced to pay even more. And people would lose the excuse it's F2P when trying to justify overpriced shit like ultimate skins. Blood and Wine contains much more models, textures, gameplay, effects, lines, storytelling for the same price, but LoL is F2P so it's fine.

From business point of view, they need to give in less effort for more money with this model, so while it would cleanse the community, they'd never do it.

Xonra1 votes

It would also turn away 99% of potential new players (which there are still a lot of, just not likely to actually play at this point), and would likely "cleanse" the game of a lot of the current players too that would be very annoyed about this sudden change on principal. Would be a middle finger to streamers who almost always have multiple accounts, or pro players that make secondary and tertiary accounts for streaming or simply hiding picks they are trying out.

Feel Apathy2 votes

What about children that want to try out the game, but do not have a debit/credit card or 25$ to pay for it though?

You know, walking down the streets and hearing 13 year old children talking about "how great Warwick is" warms me up inside, but if those same people had to spend 25$ to try out the game.. They wouldn't be playing or discussing it.

Not everyone is US and not everyone can afford to spend 25$ just to "try". - There's also Riot's refund policy to consider.

[sg-lux-2]

Saianna2 votes

You haven't considered one most important thing.

Which system will provide more money.

F2P lootbox-Skin-selling or box-selling

10cent, biggest asian.. or worldwide atm.. game company (Riot is their personal bitch on a leash) prefers when their slave-projects (such as LoL) operate the way games on asian market do. Microtransactions, HUGE GRIND, skins, lootboxes and all this uneccessary clutter. They just know they can milk a whole lot more money that way, than if they'd sell one-time boxes.

The more you know about 10cent and their way of doing business the more scared/worried you should be.

Know just 1 thing: this company has no respect towards the player. None.

Ok sure but why1 votes

"I'd like a new account" "Haha, GRIND!!!!!!! BUY OUR XP BOOSTS!!!!" "I'd like to play on NA instead of this OCE server" "THAT'LL BE $19.95!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Snowman Arc1 votes

Maybe it will leave all those 12 year olds who rage and swear and troll out of the game as well. I know we, adults, also rage and flame and troll, but little kids always are way more ragy and trolly.

BobaFlautist1 votes

Make it $40.00, with a significant discount if you get invited by an existing level 30 account.

If a level 30 account invites more than like one or two accounts that subsequently get banned for being obvious smurf boots, they get banned.

Mcsquzzy1 votes

I say all champs in the 3150 and below should be free if they make it pay too play, and $5 should no longer be the price of lowest tier skins, it should be 2 but these be my opinions and i be fine with how things are now for now

Leonerdo1 votes

I doubt it would ever happen, because LoL has always been a highly Free-to-Play game: No cost to play. Absolutely no Pay-to-WIn (now that Runes are free). And the "extra content" (i.e. new champions) can all be earned over time. It doesn't even require expensive hardware, just a toaster. All you can pay for currently are cosmetics and getting champions faster.

Which means LoL is a veeerry accessible game, from a financial standpoint, which is important to keeping new players coming and allowing League to become "an eSport for generations to come". I doubt Riot would make a 180 on that principle and suddenly start charging new players just to make an account.

That being said, there are certainly a lot of benefits to requiring payment. #1 being that bans actually mean a lot more, especially to botters. And I guess parental control is a bit easier (idk, I'm not a parent).

Honestly, it would probably be worth it at this point. Like you said, the F2P model is for new games/companies that need to find new players ASAP. Overwatch has largely the same business model as League, but they could put a 60$ box cost on top because it's a Blizzard game. And at this point League is in the same position.

I just don't see them making the switch at this point, because it upsets the status quo of so much. If Riot actually wanted to do it, they would first and foremost have to win over the community on the platform that "Smurfs are bad." Otherwise, people would just be too outraged for it to be worth it, because up until now people have been really enjoying (and sometimes abusing) the free extra accounts, and Riot has more or less condoned it.

brônco1 votes

Won't happen

Pubbi1 votes

Another issue with this is account selling. People could sell their accounts they made before the game costs money to make a new account for a lower price.

Oelyk1 votes

As much as this sounds enticing to players whom already know and love the game, I think from a business perspective changing League from a Free game with purchasable cosmetics to a box game would change the message Riot is working with when they show off their product, they don't want to hold any play whom wants to play league accountable. Think about it from an outsiders prospective If you watched a video or had a friend who played, would you join? its a very big and complicated game that rewards knowledge and has a long learning process that can deter people from paying. It can feel unrewarding. No say you have this free trial over your head, you could play for free for a month and then suddenly decide "You know what, I'm not interested enough to pay for this game." The free trial acts a a buffer for you decide whether or not you like a product, and League I don't believe is an instantly likable product. Even the champion vouchers and such that you mention, not only do they far outweigh the cost proposed(3 6300 champions is about 20$ I believe), but their are so many champions to pick from that it can often incur feelings of regret. Anyhow that's just my two cents that changing League to a box game will fundamentally change the structure in a not so good way.

Kai Guy1 votes

Id solve this issue with better bundles priced in Tiers that relate to not only the content but also lanes and difficulty of included champions.

Phil Gritty1 votes

would give me the ability to purchase 25$ troll accounts so i could ruin your ranked games when i'm on tilt from my main (instead of taking a break)

HalcyonDweller1 votes

Don't be silly. People already purchase botted accounts. That's different from what the OP is suggesting though.

I'm fairly certain that OP is suggesting we still make new accounts still go through the leveling process, but also making it cost money to create said accounts.

ValyrianBlade1 votes

I think it's a good idea conceptually, and just needs to be worked out.

First, make the fee get paid at level 10/15. Once you hit level 10/15, you can no longer play games without paying up. You're told this right off the bat of course, and you're also told all the content you're going to unlock by buying it. The point is to keep people joining league for free, if they don't know by level 10/15 that they like the game, then they're probably never going to spend money on it.

Second, the preselected 20 champs should all be cheap ones (all 450s or maybe some 1350s), to avoid giving too much value. Those champions should probably then be removed from the store or something (so new players don't immediately see they were just given all the cheap stuff).

Third, vouchers for champions should specify a BE threshold. Otherwise new players may feel obliged to use them all on 6300s even if they want other stuff. Honestly, I think it'd be better to just give them blue essence or a variety of champion shards (random mix with pre-determined number at each tier).

Skin vouchers likewise should be determined to prevent value being too high. It may be better to give a starting chunk of Orange essence, a (couple/few) skin-only hextech chests, and one voucher for up to a 1350 skin of your choice.

The advantage of illegitimate account buying being replaced isn't necessarily realistic, since players don't want to level up to 30. Existing players with an account in good standing should be able to log in to that account to make the new account start at 30.

The disadvantage for banned players returning is probably not there, due to the cost and inability to purchase at 30 without an account in good standing (unless they're regularly banned and keep one good account to always use on this, but if an account is used to create an account at 30 and that account gets banned, the other account could also be banned or at least ineligible to create more accounts (or could limit to 1 per account, because the purchased account could be used for the next one). So I'm saying we can get around that downside.

I'd argue I got around the f2p downside with the pay at level 10/15 concept. Although it would encourage early PvP instead of bot games, which kind of sucks. Maybe that level needs to be increased, or coop-vs-ai XP can be stocked up and not used to level up until you purchase (players can play bot matches for free forever).

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by Eedat

I'm not "triggered" by you throwing insults.
Player Behavior361 comments
548
votes
This new system REALLY isnt friendly to older players.....
Gameplay220 comments
495
votes
Official petition to restore Thornmail, Randuin's, and Frozen Heart
Gameplay164 comments
336
votes
PSA: Do NOT buy lootboxes with RP
Gameplay60 comments
317
votes
DynamicQ =/= Champ Select
Gameplay86 comments
231
votes
Can we get a redo on Victorious Maokai?
Story, Art, & Sound232 comments
214
votes